topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • January 19, 2018, 05:00 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Last post Author Topic: Chess?  (Read 3007 times)

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,012
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Chess?
« on: September 27, 2017, 02:06 PM »
Any Chess lovers here?
I just know the *very* basics of chess, but have started watching and really enjoying a YT chess channel:
ChessNetwork -- I particularly enjoy his analysis of famous chess games.
Screenshot - 2017-09-27 , 20_47_44.pngChess?
https://www.youtube..../ChessNetwork/videos

Also discovered a great site (www.chessgames.com) where you can 'replay' a game e.g.
Screenshot - 2017-09-27 , 20_57_38.pngChess?
Nigel Short vs Jan Timman -- "A Long Walk Off a Short Peer"

Related video from ChessNetwork:
Tom

Contro

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2007
  • *
  • Posts: 3,144
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #1 on: September 27, 2017, 03:54 PM »
I like Chess !!!!!!

What is the best free chess software ?

 :-*

Note : The video is wonderful !
« Last Edit: September 27, 2017, 04:02 PM by Contro »

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #2 on: September 27, 2017, 05:25 PM »
Mouser tipped me off to this!

I'm pretty up on chess lately. I play decently well, so maybe tomos and contro we have to cajole you guys to visit the DC chat.

I'm far from clear how we only about about eight regular chatters out of all of DC but maybe 2018 (with this a New Chatters for the New Year NCNY ) new thing could be cool.

I live on an alternating 18 hour day and Australian time, and mouser is famous for his 3am "good mornings" and "Happy lunch" at 5pm.

So both of those topics are things I could rampage on for 1000 words!


tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,012
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #3 on: September 28, 2017, 04:12 AM »
I'm pretty up on chess lately.

hi Tao, do you have any sites to recommend?
Do you play online?
Tom

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,012
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #4 on: September 28, 2017, 04:17 AM »
What is the best free chess software ?

Arena looks nice.
I suspect it is what is used in the video above -- but amn't sure about that.

Screenshot - 2017-09-28 , 11_16_53.pngChess?
Tom

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #5 on: September 28, 2017, 05:18 AM »
hi Tao, do you have any sites to recommend?
Do you play online?

Yeah I was sayin' in chat that was a bit of a "phone in post" the first time, just to prove I'm inching back into watching the board.

I have Arena and I'm pretty sure that's it too, without firing it up.

I do play online, and I play on several sites. I have official accounts on Chess.com and LiChess and Playchess. I've played on ICC (Internet Chess Club) for decades, but I let that one lapse.

As for Contro's question, "best free chess software" goes all over the map. "Strongest free chess computer player" is probably Stockfish. But I used to have a small hobby of playing weaker older chess programs because it can be less dispiriting if you actually have a chance. Also, if you can get an engine to more accurately mimic what you might actually see (to a point), that's sometimes "better".

What that complex statement means comes up in a now decade long famous discussion of "what is a computer move". After people stopped laughing at computers about 1997 (Kasparov) and up to about 2003 (Kramnik was about the last one to reliably hold draws in a big match), what transpired is everyone and their chess playing insects under the floorboard started cranking computers at the 8,000 older chess books and discovered they didn't need the old days of $70 an hour lessons anymore.

Then came the rise of the "computer move". One of the most famous is "conventional wisdom" says if you "fianchetto" your Bishop, which is sticking it on the longest diagonal "sitting next to the king" that was nearly the 4th strongest piece on the board after the Queens.

Then came the computer who ditched it for "no reason for a crappy little knight" ... to create this fantastic result where exactly every square was somehow radioactive for the opponent, then you win because you have a hazmat suit and your Russian girlfriend is wearing a bra designed for ex Chernobyl survivors and the bra can unhook into two face masks!
(Not kidding!) Then you win. Then your opponent whines. Then you shrug and drink another redbull and watch more Naka.

So sometimes older computers still don't "drop pieces" "inhuman" but the moves are almost recognizable.


tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,012
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #6 on: September 28, 2017, 05:49 AM »
^ I kind of followed that lol

So sometimes older computers still don't "drop pieces" "inhuman" but the moves are almost recognizable.

meaning inhuman in the sense they willing to sacrifice a lot?
Tom

Contro

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2007
  • *
  • Posts: 3,144
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #7 on: September 28, 2017, 06:37 AM »
What is the best free chess software ?

Arena looks nice.
I suspect it is what is used in the video above -- but amn't sure about that.

Moz2 - 28_09_2017 , 12_37_18.pngChess?
Downloading and installed. Look good !!!!!!

Moz2 - 28_09_2017 , 12_37_18.pngChess?

Contro

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2007
  • *
  • Posts: 3,144
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #8 on: September 28, 2017, 06:46 AM »
I download also StockFish https://stockfishchess.org/download/ , but I don't know how to manage
 :-[

Note : It seemed I will need something else : What you're getting: just the Stockfish engine. You will need to use your own UCI-compatible chess program.

What is it ?


TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #9 on: September 29, 2017, 07:01 AM »
^ I kind of followed that lol

So sometimes older computers still don't "drop pieces" "inhuman" but the moves are almost recognizable.

meaning inhuman in the sense they willing to sacrifice a lot?


Not exactly, there are several classes of "inhuman".

The lowest level is simply that without sacrificing, you attack and they simply don't lose a piece or get checkmated either. You might have a good chance against a living player but it keeps finding these "how the hell do you do that" moves and escapes.

The next level up is sorta in the middle of the game yes, those sacrifice combos, that "only make sense on the final two moves".  The first two moves have you going "yeah, so... show me" and then it's kinda neat.

The one I am talking about is with no special combo it just DOES things, some of which overturn 100 years of "established wisdom" except it just somehow works. Besides the weird one I mentioned, a famous category is insane combos that somehow just all amount to getting one piece. Then you just lose from level 1 see above.

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #10 on: September 29, 2017, 07:02 AM »
(edit - tired - didn't read.)

There are several, but see above, look for Arena, because I think it's supposed to be easy to just "add engine". I think even poor ol' me managed it once. : )

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,012
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #11 on: October 05, 2017, 10:51 AM »
The one I am talking about is with no special combo it just DOES things, some of which overturn 100 years of "established wisdom" except it just somehow works. Besides the weird one I mentioned, a famous category is insane combos that somehow just all amount to getting one piece. Then you just lose from level 1 see above.

Below a couple videos from another channel I started following (agadmator's Chess Channel). I like him a lot -- he's got a very relaxed style, but is much faster moving than the other channel above.

Following on from your quote there:
Two interesting untypical games (especially the first). Both with interesting back-stories, both played by humans :p


Bobby Fischer's Secret Online Match vs Nigel Short in 2000


This is Sultan Khan - The Servant who Defeated Champions
Tom

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #12 on: October 08, 2017, 03:01 AM »
Sorry Tomos,
Be careful about the "Secret Fischer" thing - it's one of the urban legends and other people's research say it's pretty likely it was a (now aging and vanished) computer of the time.

In a complex "roll-forward to roll-back" kind of time jump, modern cheat detection concepts show things like high matches between moves from a computer engine and that story. Also "it's not 1994 calling" either, so a famous trick is to intersperse other moves in between the computer ones.

Fischer was simply in a state of human collapse, and those kind of factors also sadly lead to this kind of thing being unlikely Fischer pulverizing a fresher modern top GM (grandmaster). He was one of the only "urban legends" the game had. Nearly every other top GM is "accounted for".
« Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 03:13 AM by TaoPhoenix »

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #13 on: October 08, 2017, 03:10 AM »

"Much faster moving" - what do you mean by that?

Also, chess channels is a fascinating topic, and before I say a whole lot answering "the wrong question" I need some clarification what you like and don't like in a chess channel.

Your first clue:
How strong is the presenter?

"National Master" - this tend to be about the 2250-2375 level, certainly enough to hold the airspace, but it also depends heavily what they are showing. I'm about 3 grades below that, but when showing famous material drawn from existing games especially backed by already existing grandmaster annotations and this decade's twist of computer checking, you can "back your way" into a chess lecture.

So I don't know how "strong" (the word in the culture) agadmator is. But having the Fischer item presented straight up is a little unfortunate. However, there aren't too many of those.

Sultan Khan is a little more obscure - several decades older, and also dating from a time in chess culture where we now cover more ground in 5 weeks than they did in a year "back in the day".

I'll have more to remark on current channels soon when I hear back from you!

Contro

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2007
  • *
  • Posts: 3,144
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #14 on: October 08, 2017, 05:26 AM »
 :-*

I am thinking in chess.
Is a mental sport. So I will practice in my sport area.
That is simple. While deciding the next move I will excercise with the hands and feets in front of the tactile screen.

I will a photo to clarify this and make clear how before 30.10.2017 my weight will be less than 90 kilograms.

Who will gain the party ?

 :-[

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #15 on: October 08, 2017, 07:26 AM »
:-*

I am thinking in chess.
Is a mental sport. So I will practice in my sport area.
That is simple. While deciding the next move I will excercise with the hands and feets in front of the tactile screen.

I will a photo to clarify this and make clear how before 30.10.2017 my weight will be less than 90 kilograms.

Who will gain the party ?

 :-[

Well fidgeting with your hands isn't necessarily efficient exercise!

Many scientists agree you have more energy to play if you are in shape, but you have to concentrate first! Otherwise you make a bad move, lose the game, then get lots of exercise punching pillows!

 ;D

Contro

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2007
  • *
  • Posts: 3,144
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #16 on: October 08, 2017, 09:06 AM »
We can't have everything.
But play only chess is a high price to pay.

So :

20171008_104945.jpgChess?20171008_104956.jpgChess?

Only two additional rules :

1. No limit time to play.
2. Excersize with weights while thinking.

I am reading entire books by now with this method.

"Mens sana in corpore sano"

 :-*

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #17 on: October 13, 2017, 10:17 PM »

So what'cha got going tomos?

And do ya ever wanna visit the DC chat to talk chess!?


tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,012
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #18 on: October 14, 2017, 08:33 AM »
do ya ever wanna visit the DC chat to talk chess!?

will try during the week
Tom

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #19 on: October 29, 2017, 07:21 PM »
So, semi bumping this thread.

Chess.com was laughable about three years ago, then they managed to get some cash flowing, and have started hosting blitz championships with the elite grandmasters (GM) and really scored a coup when they got arguably the second best bullet super speed GM on the planet, Hikaru Nakamura, starting new stream games live with commentary and he SO knows what he's doing. (World Champion Magnus Carlsen is actually quite terrifying in his own right, but tends not to play online.)

It's a nice change of pace because what used to happen is talented enough grandmasters basically ground down with the brutal effort curve at that level, because somewhere on the run up if you're good enough to start edging past low master in talent, it stops being a fun hobby! 0.o

Put another way, anyone about two grades up above me can "snap" a good game against hobbyists, but then they start nudging up against the pros. So then they retire from actually playing, and join the ranks of instructors and lately, web commentators.

So it's nice to see the blitz championships with all the legit players, and Hikaru is just something to behold. The funniest of all is "people" are starting to create some cultural growth in the game - a quite talented GM from Canada named Eric Hansen collected a few more titled masters under the "brand" "Chessbrahs" and their streams are fun because they slide into low R rating for language, which chess desperately needs to stop being stodgy.

So then the epic grudge matches between Eric Hansen and Hikaru Nakamura "Naka" are next level commentary. On a few occasions the "visiting masters" (Hikaru plays a few other masters online in his shows) have even left the audio stream on and Hikaru explains how he's going to win ON THE FLY.

"Oh, yeah, he's trying to put his knight there, he began trying to set that up a couple moves ago, but it's not going to work because he forgot I have Knight h5, then Rook Takes Knight Takes Queen Check Queen takes Rook takes, takes takes, push, and then he can't stop my pawn. So I'm just waiting for him to resign while I run him out of time on the clock. So hello you guys in the chat...."

\0/


TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #20 on: November 05, 2017, 09:12 PM »

There's some good chess streams coming up for November ...


tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,012
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #21 on: November 06, 2017, 09:13 AM »
There's some good chess streams coming up for November ...
please let us know more (how/where/when to access)
Sounds fun what you were describing in the previous post.

Below a couple videos from another channel I started following (agadmator's Chess Channel). I like him a lot -- he's got a very relaxed style, but is much faster moving than the other channel above.
added link in the above quote --
I'm still watching a good few of his videos. For me, it's interesting to be shown "what would happen if" etc. and he has a good style I find. He's rated around the 2000 mark himself.  The first presenter I linked to (post#1 'Chessnetwork') is rated a lot higher (IM even, but not 100% sure), but his presentation was too slow for my taste.

I have no problem with where they get the ideas they present -- I just want something accessible (and entertaining).

I do find myself slowly copping on to what the next logical move might be in not very complex situations. But then the most interesting moves can seem pretty illogical until you see what follows.

Sultan Khan is a little more obscure - several decades older, and also dating from a time in chess culture where we now cover more ground in 5 weeks than they did in a year "back in the day".

I have heard that 'modern' classical chess is often about grinding down and can be pretty boring. At my level, *any* chess game is of interest. But, again, the more dramatic ones are more entertaining. And I find the post-analysis of much more interest than the couple of 'live' videos I've seen. A good example is this great game live:
https://youtu.be/L9nKxauDbVs?t=8m23s
(cueued to random middle of game)   --   those commentators do my head in lol
Tom

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #22 on: November 19, 2017, 02:20 AM »
A quick rundown of "chess strength":
"About 2000" - the bare minimum a chess presenter needs, to even make sense with "legit advice". But watch out the whole "online ratings" thing for another day! For the moment, assume ratings in long games over live boards In Real Life.

These guys borrow HARD on existing notes made by full masters and computers - left to themselves, I am learning more and more "chess advice in 2018" is not "what 3rd rate teachers presented in 1992".  So if they just describe advice "blind" without AT LEAST checking it on a computer, in this day and age, it's a prescription for disaster. So I haven't checked agadmator's channel much, accents ARE a thing! But maybe he's good enough.

But you also have to look at "what they are presenting" - Sultan Khan really is nothing more than a "Fred Reinfeld story from 1955".

Next up, "Jerry from Chess Network" is still "only" a "national master" aka rating about 2300. That's a whole order higher than a 200 player - the ratings are *exponential*, not "linear*! So that IS right at the lowest levels to teach beginners. But he too has to rely on a lot of homework and computer checking and preferably other grandmaster notes. It IS a legit market niche to take the "compact" grandmaster notes and package them for students. But if he just said "stuff cold", he too would get laughed off the net.


« Last Edit: November 19, 2017, 02:34 AM by TaoPhoenix »

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,591
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #23 on: November 19, 2017, 02:34 AM »

So right about here, we get into "audience". And yes, "pace of delivery" is huge too, Some students need the slower pace. A modern famous grandmaster still "working in the modern internet times" with that delivery is Yasser Sierawan. I agree with you, I need a faster cadence to really "get into the zone to learn."

So Jerry still is a key notch below "the minimum standard" you really need to "go cold". Basically that mark is right near full International Master. For another post, there are technical details between that title and full Grandmaster. It has to do with getting a series of tournaments "the best of your life then you retire" and if you got stuck, there a whole swath of world class IM's who just lost too many games one at a time to get the full GM title, their brain just couldn't deliver the last 10%. more on them in a big post later.

THEN we get "presentation tone". So broadly, we start getting a few 2-dimensional graphs of things. So if both NM Jerry from Chess Network and Yasser Sierawan have a "slow delivery",they are also both still "classically professional" in tone.

Chess.com is interesting. If you check their Youtube channel, they ARE putting some legit money this year into various events. BUT you have to deal with Danny Resnch. He has a very slip-slide tone where it's a tough call he tries a bit too hard to be a full comedian and misses a lot. IF you like chess comedy, try it.

So for my next recommendation of a playing IM without a lot of excessive comedy but who is legit good enough to "be valid on the fly", but with a faster delivery, try John Bartholomew. And you said you liked attacking chess. That comes down to style. Current Championship and his recent contender are both "grinders" and I can't study them either. But there are tons of other "exciting" grandmasters out there. Lemme try one good link.

Here's a short video with a game I could stand to look art twice, featuring that Bishop to e6 move. I forgot my exact opinion when I spent a week studying this opening in medium depth but I think I chose not to use it.

https://www.youtube..../watch?v=5wvJH_I7yo8
(IM John Bartholomew on the black side of a Panov Bitvinnik Caro Kann)

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,012
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Chess?
« Reply #24 on: November 19, 2017, 10:14 AM »
"Jerry from Chess Network" is still "only" a "national master" aka rating about 2300. That's a whole order higher than a 2000 player - the ratings are *exponential*, not "linear*!
I didnt know that, makes a big difference.

Here's a short video with a game I could stand to look art twice, featuring that Bishop to e6 move. I forgot my exact opinion when I spent a week studying this opening in medium depth but I think I chose not to use it.

https://www.youtube..../watch?v=5wvJH_I7yo8
(IM John Bartholomew on the black side of a Panov Bitvinnik Caro Kann)

that was really good -- very enjoyable :up:

I reckon we have different interests here, in this thread, in our approach to videos -- that one from Bartholemew overlapped for me:
you (I think) are looking for instructional videos, I'm looking for entertainment. That, to me, was both. Advanced, pleasing, a good 'explainer', so a good teacher.

Going back to the YT channels you criticise -- I'll only mention agadmator here, because I hardly look at the other any more. He loves chess, he steeps himself in chess, new and old. He tells a good story, he explains well (I think) what's happening. Also looks at historic games, which as you say, (summarizing from memory), would be weak today. But so what! I could compare it to snooker: I love watching a good game of snooker. You go back to the 80's, the pockets were bigger, the standard of play a lot lower than today -- there's still classic games and matches from that time that are well worth watching imo.

You repeat the thing about them getting their info elsewhere: I've already said before it makes no difference to me where they get their info from, (and note btw that agadmator very often does check the moves via engine). If I'm starting to sound a bit defensive here, I think that partly goes back to the above (different interests / approaches). I watch to be entertained. Not to learn. (But I have learned a lot along the way -- which wouldnt be difficult given my standard :D). But also goes to you admitting you haven't watched much (or any?) of his channel, and still being critical. Note that I *completely* get the point that someone at that level would not be good enough to comment off the cuff about a game. So not as live commentators. But as someone who tells a story, and explains a game -- certainly, for my level (zero or so :p) at any rate. For your level, it's natural you would have different interests, and standards.

Not sure what you meant by the accent thing (are they 'cool' or something?)
Oddly, for me, Bartholomew's accent is a lot more foreign, because I have so little exposure to American accents (in media or IRL). But the accent, and moreso the voice, are important -- to me anyways -- if I'm going to be listening to someone, I'll want it to be pleasant (for want of a better word), or at least not grating.

Hope you understand my slant a bit better now!
Tom